Religion Vs Science

Time to expand the Creation Vs Evolution debate.

Why do many religious people fear science?
Recently, I heard about a christian family who lost their 11 year old daughter to a treatable illness, because they chose to keep her at home and pray for her, rather than taking her to a hospital. is this child abuse/neglect?

Some religious people do not trust science, but they're fine with technology.
But dont you need science to create technology?

Many scientists are Atheists (they dont believe in any god)
Why would this be? Does science make it impossible to believe in god?

Many Christians argue that evolution is just a theory, and therefore isnt fact.
But gravity is also just a theory, yet many people see that as a fact.

How can a book that was written well over a thousand years ago be seen as the truth, without any evidence, over scientific evidence?

Advertisement

KittensKill wrote:
Why do many religious people fear science?
Recently, I heard about a christian family who lost their 11 year old daughter to a treatable illness, because they chose to keep her at home and pray for her, rather than taking her to a hospital. is this child abuse/neglect?

Yes and no.
It's obvious to me that she should have been treated medically but their fears made them believe they were doing the right thing so I'm sure it wasn't intentional abuse, just deadly foolishness.
So I would say yes, but I can see why they would say no.
Are you saying that efforts don't count?
What if a doctor prescribed the wrong medication to someone? Is that abuse or neglect?
As for the original question of "why".... well it's probably due to their up bringing. Their parents and peers probably drove the ideas into their heads and they believed it.

Many scientists are Atheists (they dont believe in any god)
Why would this be? Does science make it impossible to believe in god?

I think it's more by the fact that they look for reasons beyond god that they become scientists.

Many Christians argue that evolution is just a theory, and therefore isnt fact.
But gravity is also just a theory, yet many people see that as a fact.

fact, theory, opinion..... they're all just labels levels of how hard you want to believe it.

How can a book that was written well over a thousand years ago be seen as the truth, without any evidence, over scientific evidence?

It's just a personal choice in what people would prefer to believe.

Both sides are heavily flawed.

Religion: I dont know where I came from, how I got here, or what made me. Hmm..It must be an all mighty, made up god that we cant see, hear, touch, smell, or anything else! That makes sense!

Evolution just has too many missing links.

Science (not evolution): At first there was nothing. Then, it exploded

Darwins theory..well..No explanation is needed.

Can I stop you right there? Just for a second?

I genuinely feel like I could clear up some of these issues, and would love to join this discussion, from the theistic/'christian' viewpoint.
But I cannot agree with the way that things have been laid out. I feel like you have set up an uneven playing field.

Why? 'Religion' is the great killer. Instead, a one-on-one relationship is actually what myself and a lot of other Christians believe in.
The word 'religion' talks about a set of practices and rituals. I won't stand on this side of the playing field.
'Science' does not have to be in disagreement with God. God created science, and all of the things that scientists earn their living studying. Scientific facts are truth by definition.

KittensKill, after looking at one of your other posts, I feel kind of confused.
In the same way that not all homosexuals have gay orgies and love to rape little kids or whatever, not all monotheists fear or even mistrust science. There are plenty of scientists who feel like their knowledge about how the world around them works has strengthened their belief in a God. There are also Christian doctors. These people don't fear medicine. Holy balls!
As for the theory of evolution, why shouldn't a theist believe that the theory of evolution is possible? I'm quite open to new suggestions, and am normally happy to have my viewpoint challenged; however, nobody has ever been able to convince me that the theory of evolution could achieve what it has independent of some kind of 'Creator'. Have you actually read The Origin of Species?

Please don't stereotype people who have a different belief system to you as ignorant cavemen. It's actually kind of offensive.

If you're trying to weed out the 14 year old pastor's kids with half-baked religious convictions, you're doing it right. And, looking at this topic, I fully believe that any intelligent person on here who wants to could wipe the floor with them.
But If you want the kind of serious discussion that I'm offering, give me a level playing field.

requiem4unicorn wrote: Please don't stereotype people who have a different belief system to you as ignorant cavemen. It's actually kind of offensive.

He did write "many" and "some" in there. How do you suggest to be less stereotyping than that?

L wrote:

requiem4unicorn wrote: Please don't stereotype people who have a different belief system to you as ignorant cavemen. It's actually kind of offensive.

He did write "many" and "some" in there. How do you suggest to be less stereotyping than that?

'Most religious people are afraid of science'
'Many Americans are fat and violent'

Inserting words like 'some' and 'many' helps, but I still feel the same way because a specific group still has been chosen. People in general are ignorant, not just people who have a belief system like Christians. People in general are fat and violent, not just Americans.

requiem4unicorn wrote:

L wrote:

requiem4unicorn wrote: Please don't stereotype people who have a different belief system to you as ignorant cavemen. It's actually kind of offensive.

He did write "many" and "some" in there. How do you suggest to be less stereotyping than that?

'Most religious people are afraid of science'
'Many Americans are fat and violent'
Inserting words like 'some' and 'many' helps, but I still feel the same way because a specific group still has been chosen. People in general are ignorant, not just people who have a belief system like Christians. People in general are fat and violent, not just Americans.

Well, many Americans ARE fat - or will you deny that? It doesn't mean that not many Germans are fat, too, and it doesn't change the fact that actually Australia is the nation with the highest percentage of obese people.
"Most" would be clearly defined though. But KK never said "most".

Aren't we allowed to adress the issue at all if you're even insulted when someone writes "some"? What do you suggest?

requiem4unicorn wrote: 'Science' does not have to be in disagreement with God. God created science, and all of the things that scientists earn their living studying. Scientific facts are truth by definition.

man created science. keep god out of it of you want me to take you seriously.

In the same way that not all homosexuals have gay orgies and love to rape little kids or whatever, not all monotheists fear or even mistrust science. There are plenty of scientists who feel like their knowledge about how the world around them works has strengthened their belief in a God. There are also Christian doctors. These people don't fear medicine. Holy balls!

never said there weren't christian doctors or scientists.
I said some religious people dont trust science. just as some atheists fear religion.

As for the theory of evolution, why shouldn't a theist believe that the theory of evolution is possible?

theres plenty of evidence for it. ever studied geology?

I'm quite open to new suggestions, and am normally happy to have my viewpoint challenged;

no you're not. you're more close minded than i am to your god.

however, nobody has ever been able to convince me that the theory of evolution could achieve what it has independent of some kind of 'Creator'.

because you're blinded by faith

Have you actually read The Origin of Species?

have you ever actually read the bible? have you seen the huge contradictions it contains?
p.s. origin of the species is just one of the first books on evolution, its not THE book. I've read plenty on the subject. And a lot more recent information... get that: INFORMATION, FACTS.
Science doesn't lie.

Please don't stereotype people who have a different belief system to you as ignorant cavemen. It's actually kind of offensive.

i find illogical people to be offensive to the intelligence of humanity. whats your point?

If you're trying to weed out the 14 year old pastor's kids with half-baked religious convictions, you're doing it right. And, looking at this topic, I fully believe that any intelligent person on here who wants to could wipe the floor with them.

HAHAHAHAHAAAA if thats what i was looking for theres plenty of other forums out there that i could troll.

But If you want the kind of serious discussion that I'm offering, give me a level playing field.

hows it not level? argue your case.

As for the theory of evolution, why shouldn't a theist believe that the theory of evolution is possible?

theres plenty of evidence for it. ever studied geology?

You completely read that wrong. Read what I typed again. No, I've never studied geology, but I said that I don't have a problem with evolution.

however, nobody has ever been able to convince me that the theory of evolution could achieve what it has independent of some kind of 'Creator'.

because you're blinded by faith

Well, that's possible too. But the real reason is because I cannot understand how life could have evolved from the non-living. I also believe that it makes more sense that some kind of 'force' set things into motion at the very beginning. This is the best explanation, in my opinion.
I can accept that forces such as natural selection can cause many many small changes in an organism over time, but I wonder about how much power these 'engines' that push things to evolve actually have. Perhaps natural selection has the power to turn a population of thin, small rabbits into larger, stronger rabbits. But I have doubt about whether it can cause a rabbit to evolve into a completely new animal. I also cannot see how it can cause new genetic information to be added.
Lastly, I feel like life couldn't possibly carry any significant, ultimate meaning is there is not a God to give our existence meaning and purpose. Without a God, we are the product of chance, living out our lives in a world that will eventually decay to the point where there is no more light and no more life. I would be uncomfortable with this idea, but would be able to accept it if I didn't have the other doubts.

have you ever actually read the bible? have you seen the huge contradictions it contains?

Most of these 'contradictions' are the result of people either taking things out of context or problems with the way that the text was translated from the original languages.

Please don't stereotype people who have a different belief system to you as ignorant cavemen. It's actually kind of offensive.

i find illogical people to be offensive to the intelligence of humanity. whats your point?

This is called the fundamental attribution error. And it's generally frowned upon.

But If you want the kind of serious discussion that I'm offering, give me a level playing field.

hows it not level? argue your case.

I've already explained this:

Why? 'Religion' is the great killer. Instead, a one-on-one relationship is actually what myself and a lot of other Christians believe in.
The word 'religion' talks about a set of practices and rituals. I won't stand on this side of the playing field.

Also, because I agree with you when you say that 'science doesn't lie'. I only disagree when you say that scientific facts contradict the existence of a God.

Well, many Americans ARE fat - or will you deny that? It doesn't mean that not many Germans are fat, too, and it doesn't change the fact that actually Australia is the nation with the highest percentage of obese people.
"Most" would be clearly defined though. But KK never said "most".

Aren't we allowed to adress the issue at all if you're even insulted when someone writes "some"? What do you suggest?

I don't think that we shouldn't be allowed to address the issue. That wouldn't even be for me to say anyway.
If I created a topic that was about 'Thin people vs. Americans' I would expect that some people would feel offended.

Why do many religious people fear science?
Recently, I heard about a christian family who lost their 11 year old daughter to a treatable illness, because they chose to keep her at home and pray for her, rather than taking her to a hospital. is this child abuse/neglect?

Why are kids afraid of the boogeyman? People are just naturally afraid of the things they don't understand, and when we feel something threatens what we believe in, we reject it. We claim to be advancing, but human beings actually will naturally resist change. Instead of moving with evolution, we try to fight it. How would you feel is someone came up to you and challenged everything you believed in for years?

Some religious people do not trust science, but they're fine with technology.
But dont you need science to create technology?

It's because we like getting the advantage. If something makes our lives easier, wouldn't we try to take it?

Many scientists are Atheists (they dont believe in any god)
Why would this be? Does science make it impossible to believe in god?

It wasn't always like that. Back during the 16th and 17th century, they used to believe in something called Deism, and that's basically the idea that God created us and then left us to our own devices. I don't know where along the line science decided to start clashing with religion, but that's what happens when you take the extremes on the ends. Scientists are like the religious; they're unwilling to open their minds to something that is outside of what they believe in, yet they claim to be open-minded.

Many Christians argue that evolution is just a theory, and therefore isnt fact.
But gravity is also just a theory, yet many people see that as a fact.

How can a book that was written well over a thousand years ago be seen as the truth, without any evidence, over scientific evidence?

Because it lets people hear what they want to hear. People want to try to eliminate fear in any way they can. It's actually not the death that we fear, but what happens after that. Nobody can answer it, and it's unknown. People like knowing that there's something better out there waiting for them. It helps people sleep at night. So believing in the aspect of an afterlife lets them do that. Science isn't telling them that there's something after life, so they'll lean toward religion since it does give them an answer, even if there is nothing to back it.

DevilOfParadise wrote: What if a doctor prescribed the wrong medication to someone? Is that abuse or neglect?

Actually yes, if a Doctor prescribes the wrong medication or doesn't prescribe any medication, and the patient suffers as a result of this, it is called negligence. Now obviously this doesn't count if mistake was an honest, i.e. the patients symptoms were misleading and any other doctor would have done the same thing. But if the mistake is due to the doctor dismissing symptoms or not spending enough time on the patient, then it's negligence.
Couple of situations:
-A patient presents with stomach pains and after some inconclusive tests, the doctor assumes it's a stomach bug, prescribes antibiotics and sends the patient home. After some more tests at a later period it's revealed that antibiotics would have only made the underlying problem worse. This isn't negligence.
- A patient is admitted with a second degree burn. The doctor treats the wound and sends the patient home. Missing signs of an infection. As a result the burn become severely infected and the patient was afterwards left with a large scar which wouldn't have been there, had the infection been caught in time. That's negligence.

On that point, preventing a child from getting medical treatment, is negligent.

fact, theory, opinion..... they're all just labels levels of how hard you want to believe it.

That's nonsense.

Akira Kazama wrote:
It wasn't always like that. Back during the 16th and 17th century, they used to believe in something called Deism, and that's basically the idea that God created us and then left us to our own devices. I don't know where along the line science decided to start clashing with religion, but that's what happens when you take the extremes on the ends. Scientists are like the religious; they're unwilling to open their minds to something that is outside of what they believe in, yet they claim to be open-minded.

All science ever did was report the facts. When Galileo stated that the earth revolved around the sun, not the other way round as the bible said, the church went out of their way to try and shut him up. Science didn't choose to clash with religion, it was always religion that took issue with what science was saying. And now finally the playing field is more level, scientists are finally free to question religion.

Also Scientists are willing to accept what religious people say, if only those people can support their claims with evidence, I wouldn't think you could get more open minded than that. But if not believing everything you're told without questioning it, makes a person closed minded, then I'd be pretty proud to say that I am.

Why do many religious people fear science?
Recently, I heard about a christian family who lost their 11 year old daughter to a treatable illness, because they chose to keep her at home and pray for her, rather than taking her to a hospital. is this child abuse/neglect?
answer:
That is horrible why would they let there child die in that case in some illness that can treatable, even If you pray so Hard you can not treat it unless you go to a hospital. Unless the illness is so severe like "cancer", "brain tumor." even God and Science cannot save it but science has the possibilities to treat it.

Some religious people do not trust science, but they're fine with technology.
But dont you need science to create technology?
answer:
I accept science because it have explained all the things why things happens and came to be. Those religious people just clung to the Invisible because they believe it is all powerful and thus can make it all happen. And in the truth it never happens.

Many scientists are Atheists (they dont believe in any god)
Why would this be? Does science make it impossible to believe in god?
answer: Difficult question and good question
Science and Religion don't merge with each other, Science is bent on exploring, reasoning, searching for the unknown and developing while in Religion you have only to do is " believe, believe, believe,"


Many Christians argue that evolution is just a theory, and therefore isnt fact.
But gravity is also just a theory, yet many people see that as a fact.

How can a book that was written well over a thousand years ago be seen as the truth, without any evidence, over scientific evidence?
answer: there is no evidence what to believe in . . .

requiem4unicorn wrote: Well, that's possible too. But the real reason is because I cannot understand how life could have evolved from the non-living. I also believe that it makes more sense that some kind of 'force' set things into motion at the very beginning. This is the best explanation, in my opinion.

the 'force' is commonly known as the 'big bang'
ever heard of spontaneous combustion?

I also cannot see how it can cause new genetic information to be added.

im gonna suck at explaining this cos im not a scientist.
its not really new information, and its not really added, its duplicated and mutated

Lastly, I feel like life couldn't possibly carry any significant, ultimate meaning is there is not a God to give our existence meaning and purpose. Without a God, we are the product of chance, living out our lives in a world that will eventually decay to the point where there is no more light and no more life.

pretty much sums it up.
there is no god
life is chance
life has no purpose other than to reproduce, and strive for survival
death and decay are inevitable

I would be uncomfortable with this idea, but would be able to accept it if I didn't have the other doubts.

other doubts?

Most of these 'contradictions' are the result of people either taking things out of context or problems with the way that the text was translated from the original languages.

LOL so much for the bible being the unfailable word of god

Also, because I agree with you when you say that 'science doesn't lie'. I only disagree when you say that scientific facts contradict the existence of a God.

i see no evidence for the existence of your god. what evidence is there other than a book written by men and peoples blind faith?

"Well, that's possible too. But the real reason is because I cannot understand how life could have evolved from the non-living. I also believe that it makes more sense that some kind of 'force' set things into motion at the very beginning. This is the best explanation, in my opinion.
I can accept that forces such as natural selection can cause many many small changes in an organism over time, but I wonder about how much power these 'engines' that push things to evolve actually have. Perhaps natural selection has the power to turn a population of thin, small rabbits into larger, stronger rabbits. But I have doubt about whether it can cause a rabbit to evolve into a completely new animal. I also cannot see how it can cause new genetic information to be added.
Lastly, I feel like life couldn't possibly carry any significant, ultimate meaning is there is not a God to give our existence meaning and purpose. Without a God, we are the product of chance, living out our lives in a world that will eventually decay to the point where there is no more light and no more life. I would be uncomfortable with this idea, but would be able to accept it if I didn't have the other doubts. "

WE ARE made from the nonliving. Our base structure is carbon, and the only thing that can explain it is the big bang. And of course we're the product of chance, you just said yourself that you can accept natural selection. If you can offer up the explanation with viable evidence maybe. But I see no evidence of God. Ever. There are an ungodly (no pun intended) amount of contradictions within the bible. What about those people that starve every day? what about those who die fighting for their country? If you say it's part of a "Greater Plan," please note that Hitler did similar things. He killed millions of Jews for a "Greater Plan." Don't take this as something against God, just saying.